Is the sitting trot passive?

R

Rookie.Rider

New Member
May 21, 2010
47
0
0
Georgia USA
I'm wondering if the sitting trot is passive, meaning the rider basically just gives in the natural motion of the horse. I'm working on learning, but since the RI only allows me to do this a few steps, once per lesson, I'm having difficulty. I understand it's not comfortable for a horse, but to me, that is how the lesson horse earns his keep.

Is it simply avoiding any kind of resistance and just giving in to the motion of the horse, or is there more to it? Do I have to worry about timing?
 
I dont understand the "uncomfortable" thing... Surely they should provide you with a horse capable of this?

My pony doesn't like sitting trot, but gradually we have built up her back she can now do the length of the school without hollowing out her back.

The quickest way to learn is to take your stirrups away, as it removes the temptation to brace with the feet in the sitrrups making an uncomfortable bounce for the horse. The same with gripping, its about relaxing through lower bakc and hips and legs, but keeping abdomnen and upper body upright without slouching or being rigid. That said if you were gripping youd find out as gripping tends to make to you topple off :giggle::redcarded:
 
You do follow the motion of the horse, but you should be poised rather than passive sack of spuds style :) Have a read of the Kinder Way section on the main NR site for some ideas on technique, you are looking for the movement to be taken up in your hips and absorbed in the small of your back. Does take practice but I would have though that any fit riding school horse should be capable of carrying you while you learn in reasonable chunks.
 
I do lose contact with the saddle, momentarily. I'm not used to the feeling or the sensation, so I'm not sure how badly, or how far along I'm progressing.

I don't think I'm gripping, as that has never been a vice of mine throughout this riding adventure. I may ask the RI if I can take away the stirrups and try it some more.

As far as the horse, this lesson horse does not seem to have a lot of "bounce". I find that I have to do a lot of work when rising the trot with this horse. Whereas on the two other horses that I've been on, the horse's back gives you the lift. My guess, and I could be wrong, this particular horse does not have much "lift", hence this is the easier horse to learn the sitting trot on. He's an American Quarterhorse, about 15.2HH. So I cannot blame the horse. I definitely need more saddle time, which is very expensive.
 
Have a look at these vids as it will give you a good idea about absorbing the movement. I would suggest that you build up sitting trot slowly by starting with a couple of strides of a slow jog trot and building up from there. The movement you make when jogging on your own two feet is similar so have a little jog with your hands on your hips, then a hand on your lower back. This will help you remember what movements you actually make.

http://www.equestrian-training.co.uk/equisimulator EE.htm
 
You ask if sitting trot is passive?

The answer is yes, while you are learning to sit trot. You need to understand the movement of the horse when it trots and to allow it to happen under you.

But later, you can control - slow or speed up or increase the activity of the trot by adjusting the extent to which you allow it, so by then it isn't passive any longer.

Riding schools vary in their use of sitting trot - Some, like yours, fearing that sitting trot by beginners may put strain on the horse, allow very little sitting trot. Students learn to rise to trot first.

Other schools - like mine - teach the classical way. We learn to sit trot first - it leads easily to sitting canter and the horses do not suffer because we are taught properly on the lunge and get a lot of practice till it becomes second nature.

To sit comfortably in trot you need (as a start) to understand what the horse's legs are doing under you. Luckily you can do this in walk. In walk, relax, breath long and slow and count the steps of the horse. 1,2,3,4. As the hind legs move you should feel one side of your seat dip down and then the other. Allow this side to side movement. Get a good feel of it through your seat bones.

Because the good news is that the movement of the hind legs in trot is the same. In trot there is a 1,2 1,2, rhythm because each hind leg moves simultaneously with the opposite front leg. But what you feel under your seat is the same side to side movement that you felt in walk - it is faster now and may be bumpier. But if you breathe slowly and deeply and try to feel that dip under first one of your seat bones and then under the other, you will find sitting trot starts to come easy.
Trot isn't, as some beginners think, a movement that bumps you up and down. The sides of your seat sink and rise alternately and you need to allow that to happen. This is the passive stage - except you will be working hard, concentrating to feel which side of your seat is sinking and which rising.

It is worth learning this movement in walk and then trot - giving thought to it, because it provides vital information for good riding. When the left side of your seat sinks, that's because the horse's hind leg on that side is now off the ground (i.e. not supporting you) and that 's the moment when (later on in canter or lateral work) it's the optimum time to tell the horse what you want him to do with that foot.

It is true that we trot with no stirrups and bareback - that is sometimes easier than with stirrups and you can get a sense of the rhythm. But if you have stirrups, you can try sitting trot just a little at a time - and switch back to rising trot whenever you like - alternating the two.

Don't be depressed by the way you have been taught. Once you have learned basic riding you can always look for a classical teacher (or Western) to improve your sitting trot - and anyway, those of us who are taught classical find rising trot more of a problem.
 
Last edited:
A superb answer from skib again!

I learnt by varyying the amount of beats my instructor wanted me to rise and sit for. By concenrating on counting this relaxed me more so I wasn;t so stiff or self concious. The counting had me focus on the horse which in turn kept me thinking about what was happening under me. Might not be the answer for everyone but it helped me as I could build up to more beats as I progressed and know by my counting just how I was progressing.
 
I'm confused by the idea of learning sitting trot first :unsure:

Surely it is extremely unlikely that someone will 'get' sitting trot in the first few attempts? While they are learning it is not the most comfortable thing for the horse, no matter how long they've spent on the lunge first and how well they are being taught (no offence meant Rookie.Rider or any other beginners, we've all bounced on a horse's back at some point). Why not teach rising trot - a far easier basic concept for most beginners - and then teach sitting trot starting from one or two strides before rising again? That way the pupil knows what kind of feeling to expect, can control the amount they do because they are able to rise if they get into difficulties and make things more comfortable for the horse.

Incidentally, it isn't necessarily the case that 'more sitting trot = classical'. My interest is classical dressage and I strongly believe that unless you have a horse that is developed enough to work 'through' with their back up you are far better staying in rising trot no matter how well you sit.

Anyway, after all that slightly OT ramble (sorry) back to the OP:

Honestly, only doing a few strides of sitting trot once per lesson is not terribly useful. As I said above, I do understand your instructor's concern about the horse but a few strides sitting followed by a few strides rising and so on is far more productive than banning it altogether, whilst being considerate of the horse's back. Could you sneakily practice changing your diagonal to get a few more strides in? :p

As most people have already said, in the learning stage then sitting trot is passive (while you learn the physical movements required). Eventually you will get to the point where it requires a helluva lot of core strength and muscle tone.
 
alwaysfallingof said:
I'm confused by the idea of learning sitting trot first :unsure:

Surely it is extremely unlikely that someone will 'get' sitting trot in the first few attempts?
Click to expand...

My 8 year old is far better at sitting trot than rising trot as she has absolutely no sense of rythm. I suspect that's not the norm though.
 
Joyscarer said:
My 8 year old is far better at sitting trot than rising trot as she has absolutely no sense of rythm. I suspect that's not the norm though.
Click to expand...

I would previously have said its not the norm - but having been teaching the kids next door, they seem much happier in sitting trot to take hands off the saddle etc - really not comfortable doing it when rising which I find strange but they feel more secure sitting trot
 
This is a reply to always falling off - because my OH started to ride aged 67 and was taught from the start by a classical teacher and in sitting trot on the lunge.

You rightly say that the use of the term classical varies. I call our RI classical because she was a friend and pupil of the late Charles Harris who spent two years at the Spanish Riding School in Vienna being taught to ride by Podhajsky. Earlier this year some of her lessons were published in Horse and Rider.
When Charles returned to the UK his sponsors were horrified at what he stipulated. One must accept that the riding world is deeply divided on many points, not just this.
Of course one thing that does upset NH people about our lessons is lunging horses and students on the circle. This is done with a Spanish caveson and side reins and on horses that are well trained.
Then there is the question of cruelty to horses' backs - This too is a cultural prejudice. In Western riding (which was born of Spanish riding) everyone rides sitting. Since my OH was aiming to trail ride in the USA, that is how he too was taught. Our grand daughter too. And on treed saddles.
If you put a child or a non rider on a horse in walk, have the rider relaxed and trusting both horse and RI, and using a suitable smooth gaited horse, the body absorbs the movement of the horse.
The movement is there even in walk. Jane Shilling desribing her first riding lesson described it as an earthquake going on under one.
Even one step by the horse obliges the human rider to adjust their balance.

I privately feel that one aim of good riding is to retain that initial sense of the movement. But what mostly hapens is that the human body adjusts unconsciously - just like getting used to being on a ship at sea.
Having been taught to sit walk, it is not a massive leap to ask the new rider to sit a slow, smooth trot - for a few steps. There isnt any bouncing or bumping when taught this way.
And it doesnt take longer than a lesson or two. It is like riding a bike. Once you haved learned it, it doesnt disappear. It seems you just do it without thinking?
It isnt a question of "more" sitting trot. But of learning to sit trot first - before you rise?
Once we have learned sitting trot, we dont actually use it very much at our RS - I use it only to ride very small circles - eml taught me that. And riding bareback or Western of course. I used it last week though, having a lesson in a snowy school - I was nervous of the conditions and it felt safer, and easier for the horse to balance at the corners.

Learning to sit trot in one's first lessons is nothing like the scenario you imagine - because (compared to rising trot) the learner rider does not have to do anything! The brain absorbs it and you do nothing - except things like reaching our head to the sky, or softening yor fingers, or whatever the skilled teacher tells you.
Rising trot by contrast involves a complicated physical movement, co-ordinating with the movement of the horse and pretty soon selecting the correct diagonal. It also involves sitting down again on the saddle - hopefully in the middle of the saddle and without a bump and without tipping forward.
Both the horse and the rider have a potentially harder time.

There is no doubt that learning to ride this way with one to one tuition and lots of time on the lunge is extremely expensive and a lengthy process. But it is also very safe. Charles Harris felt strongly that the BHS ways then current were not the safest for children.
It is very rare for anyone to fall off at our RS. My OH is quite fragile - has been riding four years, canters happily and has not yet, touch wood, had a fall.
You ask what this has to do with classical? Advanced riders come to our RI just for one or two lessons to improve their seat. We who learn from her from the start sit like that anyway. It is just that she doesnt use the specialised language for it. We are just told that it will help us not to fall off out hacking or in a spook.
However, as you probably know, the dressage world is divided about seat too - how you sit, how you sit on a circle, whether the horse moves into or away from pressure - all these discussions in which one rider cant simply please everyone. And where even great teachers have changed their opinion over time.
So, I agree that my use of classical may not be the same as yours. But one can assume the term classical is associated with sitting trot simply because it is based on the teaching of Xenophon (Classical Greek) and in classical Greece there were no stirrups.
Gifted teachers take the wisdom of the past and adapt it to their own horses, pupils and situations. The fact that I describe what my RI does, doesnt mean she does it rigidly for everyone.

But like the announcements made about films - I can assure you that no harm at all has been done to any horse used in this programme. And my RIs horses live and work to a ripe old age.
 
Hi skib,

I was going to reply to your previous post by PM since it was itself directly relating to what I had said, but then decided to put my point of view on the public board as well.

In case it helps you put my views on the matter in context, I am an RDAI of many years experience and have taught hundreds of beginner riders - both disabled and able bodied. I have spend hours and hours with hippotherapists and spent a lot of time observing and manipulating the effect the horse's movement has on the human body.

I am sure your RI is fantastic and I have absolutely no objection to lunging or side reins. I myself spent years training with someone whose trainer is Herwig Radnetter - a senior riding instructor at the SRS. Recently I have been learning with a RWYM instructor.

The point at which I have to disagree with you is where you say:
Having been taught to sit walk, it is not a massive leap to ask the new rider to sit a slow, smooth trot - for a few steps. There isnt any bouncing or bumping when taught this way.
And it doesnt take longer than a lesson or two.
Click to expand...
In my experience (as I have detailed above) this is not always true. Whether someone tends to bounce or not when they first trot depends on the 'type' of person they are. If they have fairly low muscle tone naturally then they will probably be fine. If they are normal or high tone they will tense and bounce as a response to the movement, even a slow 'jog' trot.

This is because the horse's walk has movement in 3 different directions - forwards/backwards, lateral (side to side) and rotatatory. The trot introduces a vertical 'push' that cannot be imitated in walk which usually causes beginner riders to bounce.

People with good rhythm will find rising trot easy. With others you do need to be careful that you provide a neck strap to prevent balancing on the reins, emphasise the importance of landing gently and have a 'demo' rider to demonstrate how the rising fits with the horse's trot rhythm, but I still am convinced that in the vast majority of cases it is more comfortable for horse and rider to proceed this way.

And incidentally, I wasn't asking 'what this has to do with classical', I was merely pointing out that the blanket statement in your original post of 'classical riders/teachers do x' is not necessarily accurate.

ETA - ok, I was in a foul mood when I wrote this post. I have edited it now I am in a better frame of mind...without changing the basic content :o
 
Last edited:
popularfurball said:
I would previously have said its not the norm - but having been teaching the kids next door, they seem much happier in sitting trot to take hands off the saddle etc - really not comfortable doing it when rising which I find strange but they feel more secure sitting trot
Click to expand...

I was told this is why a lot of instructors prefer to teach rising trot first. Teaching sitting trot can give a tendency for riders to become glued to the saddle, so much more difficult to then progress to things like jumping where they need to get out of it. Teaching rising trot from the start proves to them that they can balance and not fall of whilst they are moving and that they don't need to be sat down all the time - basically that they are not reliant on being sat in the saddle to stay on. Going back to sitting trot is then a case of getting them to relax and absorb the movement, but it is often easier to do that than to prise someone out of the saddle who is used to sitting and doing that.
 
Blimey alwaysfalling off I'm not sure where that little lot came from and why you are so defensive/aggresive as I didn't see anything in there that was having a go, just pointing out a well thought out counter idea to your own.

As for there being nothing so uncomfortable to the horse than someone learning to do sitting trot, I disagree totally. Having seen beginners getting the rise wrong and slapping back into the saddle from a height, and back to a different part of the saddle they came from, I'd have to say that bouncing about closer to the horses back has got to be far better than bouncing about from height and the horse not knowing when the rider is going to do it.
 
I teach sitting trot first (as per my first post on this thread).

I am not sure what people mean by "passive" but you cannot do a good sitting trot by sitting like a sack of spuds. You need to be able to separate and control your upper body from your hips (like you do on your own two feet). Most people can manage this when shown how, and I have not found that physical strength makes much difference. If somebody had real difficulty with this i would try to teach rising first, but I have never had this. Also Joyscarer makes a valid point, a bad rising trot is truly horrible and makes me wince on behalf of the horse.
 
Joyscarer said:
Blimey alwaysfalling off I'm not sure where that little lot came from and why you are so defensive/aggresive as I didn't see anything in there that was having a go, just pointing out a well thought out counter idea to your own.
Click to expand...


:redface: PMT alert :redface:
I think we may have to agree to disagree on the rising/sitting issue, I expect a lot of it comes down to the quality of instruction of either - I would rather see a slightly bouncy sitting trot than a godawful rising trot, but IMO the best possible scenario is to introduce rising trot correctly and follow it with sitting trot a few strides at a time :)
 
newrider.com
Top Bottom